[IOT] Consolidated Page Limits for Submissions

Tue Jul 7 15:15:49 UTC 2020

Thanks Sam

Susan Payne
Head of Legal Policy
Valideus
D: +44 (0) 20 7421 8255
E: susan.payne at valideus.com<mailto:susan.payne at valideus.com>

From: IOT <iot-bounces at icann.org> On Behalf Of Samantha Eisner
Sent: 06 July 2020 23:32
To: iot at icann.org
Subject: [IOT] Consolidated Page Limits for Submissions

On the last IRP-IOT call, the issue was raised on the treatment of page limitation rules for multi-party matters (i.e. whether the page limitations for written statements of 25 pages total set forth in Section 6 is an appropriate collective limit for all parties).  We had some research done on this issue.  Below is some information for the IRP-IOT’s discussion on this matter as the IOT also considers issues of serving the purpose of the IRP.
The Rules of Procedure of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation and the Rules of Court of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) both support the notion that co-parties should be treated separately for purposes of submissions/length of submissions.
As the IOT considers updating this Supplemental Procedure, the IOT may wish to consider whether any guidance should be given to parties in avoiding restatements of other party’s arguments/avoidance of duplication, as the presumed funder of the panelist fees for IRPs is ICANN through the funds to which it has been entrusted.
The rules are as follows:

  *   Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation [jpml.uscourts.gov]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.jpml.uscourts.gov_sites_jpml_files_Panel-2520Rules-2DIndex-5F-2520Copy-2DEffective-2D10-2D4-2D2016-2DIndex-2DUpdate-2D10-2D2-2D2018.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=3mBfUTvyfqDEumrbzweVIa6qFyeEmDaNE5eHQf9QFdU&m=8sOzZjU5026pk_pu22pG4E4naVmm7nXnGY7bkU2z8rE&s=WzbLOvAbMsO4bYvsIWAZCU3eFZevQGfVqn9hsesiu5c&e=> – The following rules imply that aligned parties may file separate briefs, and each brief gets the full page limit (so the parties do not have to split the page limit between them)
     *   Rule 3.2(a)(iii): Each brief submitted with a motion and any response to it shall not exceed 20 pages, exclusive of exhibits. Each reply shall not exceed 10 pages and shall address arguments raised in the response(s).
     *   Rule 6.1
        *   (c): Responses and Joinders: Any other party may file a response [to a motion] within 21 days after filing of a motion.
        *   (d): Replies: The movant may file a reply within 7 days after the lapse of the time period for filing a response. Where a movant is replying to more than one response in opposition, the movant may file a consolidated reply with a limit of 20 pages.
  *   SCOTUS Rules of Court [supremecourt.gov] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.supremecourt.gov_ctrules_2019RulesoftheCourt.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=3mBfUTvyfqDEumrbzweVIa6qFyeEmDaNE5eHQf9QFdU&m=8sOzZjU5026pk_pu22pG4E4naVmm7nXnGY7bkU2z8rE&s=BjsIYc_baZJbDGcNhEBwm1vbbv5XW_tesJi9aircgjM&e=> -  The following rules provide joint filers the choice between filing a single brief or filing separate briefs.  Either way, the page limits govern each brief individually, not each filer or the filers as a group. These Supreme Court rules may also be of interest when the IOT moves onto the task of developing rules for appeals from panel decisions.
     *    Rule 12.4 Review on Certiorari:  How Sought; Parties. “Parties interested jointly, severally, or otherwise in a judgment may petition separately for a writ of certiorari; or any two or more may join in a petition. A party not shown on the petition as joined therein at the time the petition is fled may not later join in that petition. When two or more judgments are sought to be reviewed on a writ of certiorari to the same court and involve identical or closely related questions, a single petition for a writ of certiorari covering all the judgments suffices. A petition for a writ of certiorari may not be joined with any other pleading, except that any motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis shall be attached.”
     *   Rule 18.2: Direct appeal from U.S. District Court. “. . .  Parties interested jointly, severally, or otherwise in the judgment may appeal separately, or any two or more may join in an appeal.  When two or more judgments involving identical or closely related questions are sought to be reviewed on appeal from the same court, a notice of appeal for each judgment shall be fled with the clerk of the district court, but a single jurisdictional statement covering all the judgments suffices.”
     *   Rule 33.1(g): Word limits for each type of document filed; no requirement that joint parties file a joint document or that, if they file separately, they will each be subject to a lower word limit.
Best regards,

Sam
________________________________
The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in any way by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received this message in error, please return it to the sender (deleting the body of the email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and permanently delete it. Please note that the Com Laude Group does not accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check this email and any attachments. The Com Laude Group does not accept liability for statements which are clearly the sender's own and not made on behalf of the group or one of its member entities. The Com Laude Group includes Nom-IQ Limited t/a Com Laude, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 5047655 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 06181291 and registered office at 28-30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a company registered in Scotland with company number SC197176, having its registered office at 33 Melville Street, Edinburgh, Lothian, EH3 7JF Scotland; Consonum, Inc. dba Com Laude USA and Valideus USA, headquartered at 1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600, McLean, VA 22102, USA; Com Laude (Japan) Corporation, a company registered in Japan having its registered office at Suite 319,1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan. For further information see www.comlaude.com<https://comlaude.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/iot/attachments/20200707/b96305b3/attachment-0001.html>